In addition, saying that people are rioting because of only one isolated incident is not true and reductionist. There is a history of law enforcement treating black people's lives as unimportant.
Maybe "riot response" is an ambiguous term, but I'm saying the response to the riot has to be completely legal, responding to a parent poster who was saying that it's okay for police the break the law in their response, which I strongly disagree with.
That said, rioters here seem more like opportunists than protesters..
Unfortunately, I think the police department's handling of this has only encouraged rioting. I would give them the benefit of the doubt if the officer was suspended pending an investigation or review. But he was fired. That's a mountain of paperwork and HR involvement - so they were probably pretty certain they couldn't defend what he did. But they didn't arrest him, which I'm pretty is less of a bureaucratic headache, until after the rioting.
Maybe someone can give a plausible and reasonable explanation for that sequence of events, but from where I'm sitting this just screams "rioting got our attention".
If the government is allowed to throw out the law at this point because people are rioting in response to delayed charges against a police killing caught on video, why did the government even have to exist in the first place?